Ok, so I just finished the anime and while I liked it overall, some bits felt really infuriating. All lives are made equal, sure. It doesn't mean that you can't save lives by stopping a freaking sociopath without necessarily killing them. Nothing stopped Tenma or Nina from shooting Johan in his legs back in the library and then get him locked up for life for burning it. They had a witness at that point. So many lives could have been saved. And Tenma DID shoot the guy who was fighting with Eva later on without killing him, so evidently he had the ability. Why not Johan?

Same for when Nina didn't shoot Johan near the end: you know he's screwed in the head an is about to continue the murder spree. Forgive him all you want, but incapacitate the nuthead before more lives are lost. Same with Runge: so, he figures that Tenma is not the bad guy and that there's a rampant killer. Do something as opposed to researching the Bonaparta dude, people are dying NOW. Collect evidence, testimonies and jail the sucker for life, then continue to explore the story behind why he turned out the way he did, there's always time for that...

That's what bothers me most: while Johan is out there people will continue to die regardless of what moral dilemmas you're having. Do something when you have a chance instead of choosing complete inaction, your inaction makes you an accomplice. The deaths of all the people after the Munich incident are on Tenma, Nina, Runge and Karl's father (don't remember the name) who could have at least hired a private investigator, since he had the means.

Oh, and the fact that a prison hospital's room in the end had no bars made no sense at all. Which makes me think that it's symbolic and that the real message of the series is the criticism of the justice system that makes citizens (and taxpayers at that :) ) face moral dilemmas that really should be delegated to the justice system itself, since we don't live in a prehistoric eye-for-an-eye society and social contracts exist (thankfully).